In The Ring > Fuel prices – Dad, what would you do?

THE petrol subsidy has long been taboo for people in public office.
But in view of the escalating prices of the world oil, Malaysia has reached a juncture where it can no longer afford to be the second cheapest pump price Asian country.

The situation is worsened by the fact that analysts believe that it may reach US$150 to US$200 per barrel any time in the duration between six months to two years.



Like most Malaysians coated under the veil of artifi cial pump prices, I don’t even know what the prevailing market price is, but I know RM1.92 per litre of petrol is already causing a dent in my thinning pockets.

I spoke to someone in the oil and gas industry, to allay my concerns and ask for an expert opinion on the issue of potential reduction of the petrol subsidy.

His answer caught me a little by surprise as he believes that instead of giving everyone the benefi t of the Automatic Pricing Mechanism, the subsidy should be targeted to families below a certain income threshold.

Over Starbucks, another friend opined that if we can’t invoke tax as a mechanism to reduce the burden of the deserving (because only a small percentage of Malaysians pay taxes), we should give direct cheques to people below a certain threshold or waive road tax for small cylinder cars.

But no matter how many people I speak to, how many analyses I read, on a personal level, the answer continues to evade me. I managed to do some soul searching whilst I was away in Singapore over the weekend.

It wasn’t difficult to keep it mind because the news of Malaysian subsidy made the front page on a major Singapore daily on Monday.

This is an issue of regional proportions.

At the Singapore Underwater World, my twoyear-old son and I went up to a tank to see up close one of his favourite Disney character, Nemo. Whilst his eyes were fi xed to the Nemo lookalike, another ‘uglier’ fi sh came up to him. He screamed in fear that the fi sh wanted to eat him. Of course, he didn’t understand he was separated by the glass, but as I consoled and explained the role of the glass, I began to fi nd the answer to my own burning question.

Every year, on the third week of June we celebrate Father’s Day. The main responsibility of a father is that of decision maker of the family. Like a Government to its people.

The subsidy question, if broken down is akin to being a responsible father.

Given the prospect of depleting oil reserves and the possibility of the entire Budget being used to pay for subsidies, would you agree with a policy that will adversely impact your current fi nances? Or would you fi ght tooth and nail for the subsidy to remain at current levels? The trade off for continuing the subsidy: leave the problem for the future generation to deal with? My father would not require a second to answer that question. It’s a trait of a responsible father.

However, in facing diffi cult decisions, I believe a responsible father needs to do everything within his reach to reduce the adverse impact on his family.

In the context of petrol subsidy, if we are left with no choice but to reduce the subsidy, the Government needs to increase education and awareness of the use of fossil fuels and the importance of its conservation for the sake of future generations.

In Singapore, the fl oating market price of a litre of petrol is approximately RM5.07. But the country also possesses an efficient public transport system that reduces the adverse impact on its people. We need to do more.

That is why on the balance of the arguments, my vote is for the Government that possesses the characteristics of my father. A responsible Government that makes hard choices while simultaneously reducing the burden on its people.

I bet if he could, my son would vote the same way too.